Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Boy Scouts face setback in Supreme Court
Associated Press ^ | 10/17/06

Posted on 10/17/2006 7:11:14 AM PDT by presidio9

Six years after the Supreme Court ruled the Boy Scouts could ban gay leaders, the group is fighting and losing legal battles with state and local governments over its discriminatory policies.

The latest setback came Monday when the high court without comment refused to take a case out of Berkeley, Calif., in which a Scouts sailing group lost free use of a public marina because the Boy Scouts bar atheists and gays.

The action let stand a unanimous California Supreme Court ruling that the city of Berkeley may treat the Berkeley Sea Scouts differently from other nonprofit organizations because of the Scouts' membership policies.

Two years ago, the court similarly rejected a Boy Scouts appeal of a case from Connecticut, where officials dropped the group from a list of charities that receive donations from state employees through a payroll deduction plan.

And in Philadelphia, the city is threatening to evict a Boy Scout council from the group's publicly owned headquarters or make the group pay rent unless it changes its policy on gays.

On a separate matter, federal judges in two other court cases that are being appealed have ruled that government aid to the group is unconstitutional because the Boy Scouts of America requires members to swear an oath of duty to God.

Despite the string of legal setbacks, lawyers for the Scouts said they believe the Supreme Court ultimately will decide that governments are improperly denying benefits that they make available to similar organizations.

"The issue of governments seeking to punish organizations for exercising their First Amendment rights is a recurring one. There will be other opportunities for the Supreme Court to affirm First Amendment protections for organizations dealing with government agencies," George Davidson, the longtime attorney for the Scouts, said in a statement.

Duke University law professor Erwin Chemerinsky agreed that the justices probably have not had their last say on the Boy Scouts and may be waiting until lower courts disagree on the issue.

"This is about when governments can impose requirements for getting government benefits," Chemerinsky said.

In 2000, the court ruled that the Scouts have the right to ban openly homosexual scout leaders, a decision that rested on First Amendment rights.

"The Boy Scouts asserts that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values it seeks to instill," then-Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote for the court in a 5-4 decision.

Even so, the California Supreme Court said in March that local governments are under no obligation to extend benefits to organizations that discriminate.

Berkeley, home of free speech protests since the 1960s, adopted a nondiscrimination policy on the use of its marina in 1997 and revoked the Sea Scouts' subsidy a year later.

The Sea Scouts are a branch of the Boy Scouts. They teach sailing, carpentry and plumbing. City officials had told the group that it could retain its berthing subsidy if it broke ties with the Boy Scouts or disavowed the policy against gays and atheists, but the Sea Scouts refused.

Eugene Evans, who leads the Sea Scouts, has been paying $500 a month to berth one boat at the Berkeley Marina. The group removed two other boats because it could not afford the rent. The group has about 40 members, down from as many as 100 before the subsidy was removed.

Berkeley had allowed the Scouts free use of the marina since the 1930s, according to Evans.

The Sea Scouts said they were singled out because Berkeley's elected officials disapprove of the Boy Scouts' membership policies.

The case is Evans v. City of Berkeley, 06-40.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: aclu; boyscouts; bsa; bsalist; homosexualagenda; lavendermafia; letthewookiewin; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-105 next last

1 posted on 10/17/2006 7:11:14 AM PDT by presidio9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: EdReform; wagglebee; Grampa Dave; little jeremiah; ItsOurTimeNow; Coleus; wideawake

ping


2 posted on 10/17/2006 7:14:01 AM PDT by presidio9 (Make Mohammed's day: Shoot a nun in the back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: presidio9

We were with our son selling popcorn at a Show and Sell last weekend, when someone felt the need to come up to us and say he wasn't going to buy popcorn to support a group that discriminates against homosexuals. I'm sorry to say that I was so shocked that I didn't have a ready reply and just stood there with my mouth open.


4 posted on 10/17/2006 7:16:26 AM PDT by sportutegrl (This thread is useless without pix.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

The Scouts are nowhere without private benefactors. This is the way they've always prospered, at least from my experience.


5 posted on 10/17/2006 7:16:51 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (BTUs are my Beat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Hopefully philanthropy will step in to save traditional values of scouting.

I don't see why the court would stop at scouting- many churches do not allow perform or sanction gay marriage- I guess they lose their tax exempt status next. Soon USA will be an entire nation where citizens must accept sodomy as a "natural right" to be taught to the youngest of us as just another normal, to obtain federal tax benefits.


6 posted on 10/17/2006 7:17:17 AM PDT by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl


I think something like "enjoy your no popcorn, butt pirate," would have sufficed.


7 posted on 10/17/2006 7:18:55 AM PDT by presidio9 (Make Mohammed's day: Shoot a nun in the back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl

"There is nothing in the history of our country that prohibits homosexuals from establishing their own youth mentoring organization - after all, they have NAMBLA!"


8 posted on 10/17/2006 7:19:31 AM PDT by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
I guess they lose their tax exempt status next.

I think that's coming soon, too.

9 posted on 10/17/2006 7:21:23 AM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Pookyhead


This ruling was issued by California's State Supreme Court. The Scouts think things may be different when the appeal to SCOTUS, and I tend to agree with them.


10 posted on 10/17/2006 7:21:49 AM PDT by presidio9 (Make Mohammed's day: Shoot a nun in the back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
It's about time an organization like the Boy Scouts told these governments to go f#ck themselves, and stop pretending that it is anything other than a private, non-profit organization that abides by its own rules. If they want to have a Sea Scout troop in Berkeley, let them get a wealthy private donor to buy them their own marina.

Any person or group who relies on The State for their well-being and solvency has no reason to complain when The State starts making outrageous demands of them.

Two years ago, the court similarly rejected a Boy Scouts appeal of a case from Connecticut, where officials dropped the group from a list of charities that receive donations from state employees through a payroll deduction plan.

The Boy Scouts were the wrong plaintiff in this case. They would have had a much better chance of succeeding in court if the suit had been brought by a donor who was not permitted to donate to his/her favorite charity through this plan.

11 posted on 10/17/2006 7:22:46 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
Hopefully philanthropy will step in to save traditional values of scouting.

Every Bible-based, true-teaching church could charter a Pack (Cub Scouts) and a Troop (Boy Scouts), actively recruit in their local neighborhoods, and include Scouting as part of their Youth Ministry. Just like so many NCC churches do.

12 posted on 10/17/2006 7:23:37 AM PDT by polymuser (There is one war and one enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
The AP is engaged in bigoted reporting. The Boy Scouts are not engaging in "discrimination." They are exercising their First Amendment "freedom of association" as recognized by the Supreme Court in Dale v. Boy Scouts.

And this is not a theoretical matter. The decision of the Boy Scouts that it is dangerous to have adult homosexuals as leaders is a matter of the safety of those in their care. Witness Gerry Studds (D-Mass) who actually seduced a young boy, and Mark Foley (R-Fla) who sent nasty messages to a boy.

The Scouts are right on the law, and right on the practicalities of the matter. The AP is being politically correct by avoiding the fact that adult homosexuals are dangerous to young boys.

Congressman Billybob

Latest article: "An Open Letter to President Bollinger"

Please see my most recent new statement on running for Congress, here.

13 posted on 10/17/2006 7:24:53 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob (Have a look-see. Please get involved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

The left's battering of the Boy Scouts has been led by the radical homosexual movement in the Democratic party. That the Democrats led the assault on Scouting will be forever to their shame.


14 posted on 10/17/2006 7:26:43 AM PDT by CometBaby (You can twist perceptions .. reality won't budge!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
You know, it's kinda funny how the 1st Amendment was meant to protect the right to a good conscience before the divine (how else would you describe religious liberty?) and political speech ... but now protects anything but these.

The also funny thing is, that after the 14th Amendment extended the first eight amendments to cover the several States it was still not the case that any aspect of Federal laws (which cases like these pervert) could respect civil rights that Persons or private groups could not disparage.

Homosexuals and their allies are proving the words of Paul in Romans true every day.
15 posted on 10/17/2006 7:28:03 AM PDT by Rurudyne (Standup Philosopher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
The Scouts, at their own expense, built a breakwater in the Berkely Marina in return for their "perpetual lease" on two spaces for docking. So, the City of Berkeley "stole" the breakwater from the Scouts by keeping it, not paying for it, yet breaching the lease they had agreed to.

Unfortunately, this issue was not properly developed at trial, and therefore could not be presented to the Supreme Court.

John / Billybob

16 posted on 10/17/2006 7:28:35 AM PDT by Congressman Billybob (Have a look-see. Please get involved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

What the hell are you talking about? It's a PUBLIC marina. Wanna bet there's some gay group who is enjoying free use of public property because of Berkeley's arbitrary rules? Plenty of not-for-profit groups are discriminatory. Do you really want to open that Pandora's Box? The end result of rulings like this will be "mo more Boy Scouts." Is that a good thing in the name of buttsex equality?


17 posted on 10/17/2006 7:28:47 AM PDT by presidio9 (Make Mohammed's day: Shoot a nun in the back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob; All

Do you happen to know, how long has it been that the Girl Scouts have allowed male leaders? I was amazed when this was pointed out to me. It's a bad idea, just as allowing homosexual males to lead Boy Scouts is a bad idea.


18 posted on 10/17/2006 7:30:21 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (Guns themselves are fairly robust; their chief enemies are rust and politicians) (NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob

Perhaps it's time for the Boy Scouts to undertake a special progect for their Berkeley troop . . . "Demolition of Breakwater and Other Marine Infrastructure."


19 posted on 10/17/2006 7:30:39 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
You're not making a good argument that Boy Scouts should have access to this public marina.

You're actually making a very good argument that a "public marina" shouldn't even exist in the first place. That rationale should also be extended to just about everything else we've come to expect from government these days -- public schools, public hospitals, public housing, etc.

20 posted on 10/17/2006 7:32:27 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
Unfortunately, this issue was not properly developed at trial, and therefore could not be presented to the Supreme Court.

So instead of blaming a Communist government and legal system for this, are you saying the Boy Scouts should be suing their own lawyer for his/her incompetence?

21 posted on 10/17/2006 7:34:42 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
This is about outlawing traditional values. California's new SB 1441 law provides a blueprint for how to accomplish it. Which isn't just limited to the Boy Scouts.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus

22 posted on 10/17/2006 7:34:43 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child; twigs
A BSA unit (pack, troop) exists as a chartered subgroup of an existing organization (church, civic organization, VFW post, etc.). Units seek chartering organizations agreeable with their cause, and the chartering organization agrees to the BSA's purposes in a signed charter document. A unit is financially under the auspices and on the books of their chartering organization. Also, the BSA receives unique regard from the U.S. Congress. Or used to, at least. But then, public schools used to teach from Christian bibles.

Those that have worked to neuter American men feel they're quite successful, and now target our sons.

23 posted on 10/17/2006 7:36:34 AM PDT by polymuser (There is one war and one enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
You're actually making a very good argument that a "public marina" shouldn't even exist in the first place.

Possibly, but that's a moot point, because it DOES, in fact exist. As long as it exists, the Scouts have as much right to it as any other organized group.

24 posted on 10/17/2006 7:37:22 AM PDT by presidio9 (Make Mohammed's day: Shoot a nun in the back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

Girl Scouts was lost years ago. New-age psycobabble abounds there.


25 posted on 10/17/2006 7:38:22 AM PDT by polymuser (There is one war and one enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
The AP is engaged in bigoted reporting. The Boy Scouts are not engaging in "discrimination."

I thought about that. They definitely used the word to make an emotional point. But the AP statement is technically accurate. The policy is discriminatory. It is not morally, ethically, or legally wrong per se to discriminate in hiring. It depends on the nature of the thing and what group is involved.

Since the Boy Scouts discriminate against instating openly gay leaders, isn't that like the policy of the U.S. military (don't ask, don't tell)?

26 posted on 10/17/2006 7:41:20 AM PDT by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: polymuser
Those that have worked to neuter American men feel they're quite successful, and now target our sons.

All the more reason to raise our sons outside the grasp of any government or government-sponsored organization, right?

27 posted on 10/17/2006 7:42:42 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: CometBaby
That the Democrats led the assault on Scouting will be forever to their shame.

Now's a great time to make that point. Repeatedly.

As far as the activists, the book "After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90's" laid out the plan that is working so effectively for them.

28 posted on 10/17/2006 7:44:21 AM PDT by polymuser (There is one war and one enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
As long as it exists, the Scouts have as much right to it as any other organized group.

Be careful what you wish for. Whenever the subject of a private organization's access to public assets comes up, I always present a hypothetical scenario in which a radical Islamic sect wants the same access to these public facilities as an organization like the Boy Scouts.

29 posted on 10/17/2006 7:45:54 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: polymuser

Not in our homeschool Girl Scout troop. We start each meeting with the pledge, including "under God," and a patriotic song, usually "God Bless America." The Girl Scouts as a national organization is fairly PC, but that can be easily mitigated by the moms running the troop.


30 posted on 10/17/2006 7:46:38 AM PDT by LadyNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: polymuser

How ironic is it that people like that bunch of Muslim cab drivers who refuse to pick up passengers with alcohol and passengers with dogs may end up being this country's best line of defense against this radical homosexual agenda?


31 posted on 10/17/2006 7:48:37 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob

I wasn't aware that they had built a breakwater.

Any chance that they can sue Berkley for the value (or the cost) of the breakwater...then use the money to buy dock spaces?


32 posted on 10/17/2006 7:49:49 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
All the more reason to raise our sons outside the grasp of any government or government-sponsored organization, right?

Yep. And for an understanding of what's happened to our public schools, we must go back to mid-1900's The Frankfurt School and those peoples' plan. That's where the plan to subvert government schools and the tools of consensus building and sensitivity training were conceived. This stuff didn't just happen.

33 posted on 10/17/2006 7:49:55 AM PDT by polymuser (There is one war and one enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

This was the appeal to SCOTUS, which refused to hear the case.

"The action let stand a unanimous California Supreme Court ruling".


34 posted on 10/17/2006 7:50:06 AM PDT by linda_22003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Redleg Duke

did you see this?


35 posted on 10/17/2006 7:52:14 AM PDT by DollyCali (Don't tell GOD how big your storm is -- Tell the storm how B-I-G your God is!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Whenever the subject of a private organization's access to public assets comes up, I always present a hypothetical scenario in which a radical Islamic sect wants the same access to these public facilities as an organization like the Boy Scouts.

And what makes you think the America-haters in Berkeley would have the slightest problem with a radical Islamic group?

36 posted on 10/17/2006 7:53:20 AM PDT by presidio9 (Make Mohammed's day: Shoot a nun in the back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
And what makes you think the America-haters in Berkeley would have the slightest problem with a radical Islamic group?

They'll fear the radical Islamic group in a way that they would never fear ordinary Americans.

37 posted on 10/17/2006 7:54:58 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: sportutegrl
I'm sorry to say that I was so shocked that I didn't have a ready reply and just stood there with my mouth open.

My son and I encountered a similar situation a couple of years ago while selling popcorn in our annual fund-raiser. A woman not only decided not to buy, but felt the need to assert that her reason was the "discrimination" against homosexuals.

My son listened carefully as I responded in a friendly voice, "You are certainly entitled to your opinion and we are certainly entitled to ours. Thanks for taking the time to let us know what you think."

That pretty much defused the potential confrontation and ended the discussion.
38 posted on 10/17/2006 7:56:00 AM PDT by TheCornerOffice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child


They should, as they would be first on the religion of peace hit-list, but they don't. Hating Bush and anything associated with him is more important to them.


39 posted on 10/17/2006 7:56:25 AM PDT by presidio9 (Make Mohammed's day: Shoot a nun in the back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
The AP is engaged in bigoted reporting. The Boy Scouts are not engaging in "discrimination."

Actually, they are. "1 a : the act of discriminating b : the process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect are responded to differently 2 : the quality or power of finely distinguishing."

On the one hand, you have the a hoterosexual scout master. OTOH, a homosexual. Responding to those situations differently is the essence of discrimination.

The left has twisted the language. Intuitively, folks respond to the word discrimination as a bad thing. But the ability to tell the difference between good and evil is precisely what the left seeks by attacking the word "discrimination."

Discrimination exercised wisely is a good thing. Discrimation exercised foolishly . . .

40 posted on 10/17/2006 7:57:26 AM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Disgusting, how people hate the Boy Scouts so.

Maybe they should turn their energies against the terrorists, rather than this fine group which chooses to preserve American values.

Oops, I guess that's the problem . . .


41 posted on 10/17/2006 7:57:35 AM PDT by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rzeznikj at stout; Nowhere Man; pcottraux; trussell; WFTR; Rca2000; Army Air Corps; proud_yank; ...

you might find this thread interesting


42 posted on 10/17/2006 7:57:53 AM PDT by DollyCali (Don't tell GOD how big your storm is -- Tell the storm how B-I-G your God is!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
"I don't see why the court would stop at scouting- many churches do not allow perform or sanction gay marriage."

That's a different story. Churches don't do that because it's against their own teachings, and the government can't pass laws that force Churches to violate their beliefs.

"I guess they lose their tax exempt status next."

That may come to pass. But in a battle between retaining tax exempt status, and standing by their beliefs, Churches should be happy to pay taxes.

43 posted on 10/17/2006 7:59:14 AM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

Interesting.

So I (male) cannot be a girl scout leader?
Not that I want to, but it makes an excellent counterpoint. Do the girl scouts "discriminate"?

Would my 17 year old son be allowed to play on the High School girls volleyball team, since there isn't a boys volleyball team? Or does the school "discriminate"?

Would I be allowed to participate in a pro-choice rally with my strict (and vocal) pro-life opinions, or would I be arrested as a disruptor? Or do the infantciders "discriminate"?

Can I go to a mosque and praise Jesus? Or do the Muslims "discriminate"?


44 posted on 10/17/2006 8:00:10 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
"Any person or group who relies on The State for their well-being and solvency has no reason to complain when The State starts making outrageous demands of them."


45 posted on 10/17/2006 8:00:43 AM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CometBaby
That the Democrats led the assault on Scouting will be forever to their shame.

Does anyone remember which Democract national convention featured a flag presentation by Boy Scouts -- with some in the audience booing them? I'd love to see that used in campaign ads.
46 posted on 10/17/2006 8:00:50 AM PDT by TheCornerOffice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Why can't a responsible adult within the Sea Scouts 'make a donation' buy taking on the slip lease himself -- ie. keep the Sea Scouts name off the paperwork. Could the marina then keep the Scouts off the property? I doubt it.


47 posted on 10/17/2006 8:03:09 AM PDT by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Nothing like those great conservative Supreme Court justices.


48 posted on 10/17/2006 8:03:19 AM PDT by TBP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842
"Maybe they should turn their energies against the terrorists, rather than this fine group which chooses to preserve American values."

As a private, member-only organization, you can demand to run your organization according to your own values, which is completely within their right, but you can't then turn around and demand the right to free use of publicly-funded facilities.

49 posted on 10/17/2006 8:03:39 AM PDT by Luis Gonzalez (Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

A few links of possible interest:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1020917/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1663939/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/854123/posts
http://www.scouter.com/forums/viewThread.asp?threadID=136820


50 posted on 10/17/2006 8:04:16 AM PDT by polymuser (There is one war and one enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-105 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson